TJD

joined 10 months ago
[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So then vote on each specific law individually and stop throwing a fit if its all stuff you're confident in. Simple as.

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago

No you fucking weren't. You were just spamming about free speech because you just wanted to regurgitate whatever talking points you read and didn't care to notice that I never once said otherwise.

Have a good one hombre, I don’t think it’s worth continuing any “conversation” here.

Glad you finally realized you have nothing remotely worth saying. Good riddance.

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

This is a free speech issue, the free market dictates they can do as they please.

I never said otherwise you fucking retarded imbecile. Get with the fucking conversation or stop spamming your moronic shit.

[–] TJD 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Jesus you're fucking dense. Yes, there's an encyclopedia of laws to be passed. No, it doesn't justify forcing them all into one big yes/no

[–] TJD 1 points 8 months ago (5 children)

I could make an entire encyclopedia of law just under one incredibly generic principle like you're doing. It doesn't make it into a specific policy just because it shares a theme.

[–] TJD -3 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Ahh, I didn't realize you were just pro-corporate censorship via advertiser interest. Should've lead with that. See, not all of us agree that advertisements having such a major sway in what we all see is a good thing.

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (7 children)

It's entirely severable. The article clearly listed multiple distinct topics. Measures could easily be made for each separate one.

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (9 children)

So you agree it's broad then? Cool. They should either pass individual ballot measures or fuck off. Just crying "rights" isn't an excuse to sidestep good legislatige process

[–] TJD -3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)

You, if you've already forgotten, called musk a "manchild" for not just doing what advertisers wanted. When you were asked why the advertisers are not also "manchildren" for crying about what's on Twitter, you just tried to change the topic to free markets. Nobody, anywhere, was saying that the advertisers were not allowed to pull out. You were asked a question of value about their choice to pull out.

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (11 children)

You seriously fail to understand how "everything related to those topics" is not a single issue bill?

[–] TJD 0 points 8 months ago (13 children)

The fucking article told you that.

[–] TJD 1 points 8 months ago

Lmao I wonder how all the people talking about how politicians need to be younger and more knowledgeable about what they're legislating about will feel about him

view more: next ›